Ok, I'm thinking about building a new system when I get back home in Febraury (I know, stuff will change by than, but at least I can get an idea).
I'll mainly use this for internet, watching movies and music, but also some Photoshop and planning on starting to do some gaming (FSX, CoD, and whatever else catches my eye)
I'm familiar with the inside of a computer, I've upgraded the video card on my desktop, added a sound card,RAM,and an internal hard drive, so I'm not scared. I'm just behind the times.

Anyway, here are my questions:
They sell mutli-processor boards, what are the advantages of those versus single processor boards? Is there an advantage of having, lets say, two slower dual-core processors rather than one faster dual-core processor (or one quad-core)? And, oh yea, AMD or Intel?
Video cards: same thing, I'veread a little about SLI and CrossFire, what's the advantages of having two video cards rather than one that spec'd out better?

OS: I like XP, I haven't used Vista, and I'm not fond of whatI hear. On the new rig, should I go with XP or Vista? Actually, I'll tell you: unless you can give me a good reason to go with Vista, I'll be using XP. I'll spend money to upgrade to Vista later happily, but I'll be unhappy if I hate it and decide to pay to "downgrade" to XP.

With the processor and video card question answered, it will help narrow down my mobo decision, as I know what I'd want on one.
Thanks ahead of time for answers and input!

 

forthe uses you listed a multi processor motherboard is a waste. what you need a daul or quad core processor. amd and intel have new chips coming out and prices will be different by then too. so that is hard to call right now. amd is going to make a 3core processor so we will have to see about that.

sli and crossfire are the same concept. i would recommend nvida because they seem to have better more stable cards. i have sli dont use it yet but having that option is important to me. you will need a sli power supply and apparently sli capable ram. i dont quite get what ram has to do with sli, but the patriot ram i bought was advertizing the sli part of it. 2 card double perforamnce to me seems like a better price/perforamnce then buying 1 expesive one. even if you dont run vista look for a directx 10 card. i think 10.1 will be out with vista sp1 so 10.1 cards will be out then. most importantly buy a card that is hdcp. if you ever feel like adding a hddvd or bluray drive the hdcp will be very important.

i have the asus m2n-sli deluxe motherboard just so you know where i am coming from.

vista is an aquired taste. i have had xp pro since it came out, when i redid my computer 2 montsh ago i tried vista ultimate. i was very offended by it at first, but as i got used to it the more i liked it. eventually i decided to stick with vista. if money is an issue and you dont have much experience with vista i would stay with xp. vista is better, but dont spend money on somehting you dont know if it is worth or not.

alot changes fast so i would wait and ask again closer.

 

Unless you're using an OS or application which specifically takes advantage of the multi CPU capabilities it's a waste. Often times the performance curve will peak out at two. After two in many cases you getthe point ofdiminishing returns as the OS will spend more time dividing the load between the installed and active CPUs than it would be doing actual work.

Also keep in mind that Windows 2000/XP workstationare onlylicensed for only two CPUs. Your duo core CPUs appear to your x86 class OSes as two physical CPUs so unless you get an XP or 2003 server license, the other processors will most likely sit idle doing nothing. I haven't tried running a Microsoft OS on anything more than a dual so I can't confirm if this is the case but it wouldn't surprise me if it was true.

Your only option in that case is pay for a Microsoft server OS orgo to a free *nix based OS such as *BSD or Linux. Even then I wouldn't consider going above a dual CPU configuration. I'm a network engineer by trade and none of the x86 based servers we haveat my place of employmentare running anything more than a dual CPU. Many are single.

As for Vista, I never touch any Microsoft OS until it reaches service pack 1.

The only advantage to having multiple video cards is if you're running a special application that takes advantage of a particular card or to have a multi headed set up (i.e multiple monitors). It's best to buy a single card that supports a dual headed configuration than it is to buy multiple cards. I'm rather fond of the ATI Radeon cards myself for this purpose.

 

I bought a new Toshiba Satellite with Vista on it a couple of months ago. Like Nick said, it's an acquired taste. At first I seriously considered going back to XP, but now I like it enough to stick with it. I just hated having to give up a perfectly good printer and several games.......

Dusty